Fianna Fail and Fianna Gael are the same

meditraitor

I am finding it very difficult to find any real difference in the ideals,running, makeup and politics of these two parties. They have between them run this country for nearly 90 years now. It does look like a cosy cartel.

As we look around at the current poltical landscape and the disaster the powers that be have caused the economy should we really be looking at FG as the saviour. Are they not just the little brother of FF. The same blood as such and every bit as likely to cause ruin, tell lies and be partial to a bit of fraud as the past and current times have shown us.

Am I wrong..... I wish I was, so please enlighten me

1.Is there a real difference between these two parties?

2.Is a vote for FG against the present government really a vote for change?

3.Which of the two parties has let us down the most during their time a majority leaders in government?

One last thing I have noticed and it is the smear that there is no alternative, both of these parties have been using this for half a century now and we have fallen for it.

None of the other parties, SF,Labour, greens have been in power for a couple of generations(majority) so how can they say this?

Will we be fooled again, I hope not but ....................

Roll on enlightenment

Time Magazine

Enlightenment #1: It's Fine Gael.

trapsagenius

meditraitor wrote: »

I am finding it very difficult to find any real difference in the ideals,running, makeup and politics of these two parties. They have between them run this country for nearly 90 years now. It does look like a cosy cartel.

As we look around at the current poltical landscape and the disaster the powers that be have caused the economy should we really be looking at FG as the saviour. Are they not just the little brother of FF. The same blood as such and every bit as likely to cause ruin, tell lies and be partial to a bit of fraud as the past and current times have shown us.

Am I wrong..... I wish I was, so please enlighten me

1.Is there a real difference between these two parties?

2.Is a vote for FG against the present government really a vote for change?

3.Which of the two parties has let us down the most during their time a majority leaders in government?

One last thing I have noticed and it is the smear that there is no alternative, both of these parties have been using this for half a century now and we have fallen for it.

None of the other parties, SF,Labour, greens have been in power for a couple of generations(majority) so how can they say this?

Will we be fooled again, I hope not but ....................

Roll on enlightenment

I can see this thread descending into a farce.The fact you don't even know that they're called "Fine Gael" is ominous.Also, Labour and the Greens were never in a majority in the Dail.

ronaneire

The whole lot of them are the same. Every last one of them.

Junco Partner

yep they're the same the civil war is the reason they're 2 parties not one ff anti-treaty fg pro- treaty
theres a bit moree to it then that but thats basically it

does any one find it odd that there politics are the same they're both centrists i.e not left or right nearly every other nation the main parties are opne or the other like the republicans(right) and democrats(left) in the us

meditraitor

Time Magazine wrote: »

Enlightenment #1: It's Fine Gael.

Too subtle for ye I suppose... apologies I will write a seperate thread.

Thread title
FF FG the same,

The spelling eror was on purpose :P

gent9662

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Doesn't matter which one of them assumes power, they are all the same. I really feel that we have gone below rock bottom with these ****3rs. There is not one honest leading light in the whole country.

Fine Fail=Fina Gail

meditraitor

trapsagenius wrote: »

I can see this thread descending into a farce.The fact you don't even know that they're called "Fine Gael" is ominous.Also, Labour and the Greens were never in a majority in the Dail.

It will only decend into a farce if you dont engage or read the post, I never said either was in government?

trapsagenius

meditraitor wrote: »

It will only decend into a farce if you dont engage or read the post, I never said either was in government?

Well you said

meditraitor wrote: »

None of the other parties, SF,Labour, greens have been in power for a couple of generations(majority) so how can they say this?

This implies that before a couple of generations ago they were in a majority.This is wrong.

Actually though, you're third point where you ask which party had let us down most in government was a good question though.The answer to this is FG.But FF have erred many times as well.

Liam Byrne

Fine Gael is similar to Fianna Fail, only without the same level of/condoning of corruption.

In terms of accountability, competence and willingness to make the required changes/decisions there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of difference.

But the vested interests and corruption are enough for me to lean towards FG, at least until a more viable alternative appears on the scene.

The Greens - and previously the PDs - promised this in relation to their ethics, but both of those got assimilated.

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

Actually though, you're third point where you ask which party had let us down most in government was a good question though. The answer to this is FG. But FF have erred many times as well.

Do explain (this should be worth a laugh).

FF have "erred many times as well" ???

dlofnep

They are both populist parties, and generally have similar politics. Neither one of them will change the political landscape of Ireland. FG will tell you that they are the best party to get the job done - but there's a reason FG never held onto power in Ireland for any substantial period of time.

They might win the next election, but you can be sure they'll be back out the door again with Fianna Fáil taking their place.

Junco Partner

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Fine Gael is similar to Fianna Fail, only without the same level of/condoning of corruption..

I'm pretty sure the level of corruption is the same fine gael just aren't under the spotlight or scrutinised as much so it doesn't come out. dig under the surface a bit and i'm sure there'd be plenty of scandal

Liam Byrne

dlofnep wrote: »

....there's a reason FG never held onto power in Ireland for any substantial period of time.

Yup, because certain sections of the electorate view them as the emergency services when FF screw up.

FG come in, steady the ship with long-term stability in mind, and then some people decide that they want it all now, so they vote FF back in for a quick smash-and-grab, ignoring the previous track record.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Do explain (this should be worth a laugh).

FF have "erred many times as well" ???

Well, I could go through the pros and cons of every administration in the state but I won't.Look at the FG Taoisigh-Costello-good in the 1st term, poor in the 2nd.Liam Cosgrave, while somewhat unlucky with regards external factors such as the oil crisis, was also a poor Taoiseach.Fitzgerald was in my opinion the worst Taoiseach in the history of the state.Bruton had the economy and especially NI handed to him on a plate by Reynolds and he still managed to fvck NI up.By contrast, FF have had (imo) the 2 best Taoisigh in Dev and Lemass.Reynolds was also good.

Having said that, I do realise that FF have "erred" over the years(don't really know why I said erred to be honest).You look at what Haughey, Lawlor and Burke did and it is really shameful.Lynch's implemented manifesto from 1977 was economic suicide.Dev's administration from 1951 to 1954 was a disaster, as were Haughey's first 2.

Liam Byrne

f0ggy92 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the level of corruption is the same fine gael just aren't under the spotlight or scrutinised as much so it doesn't come out. dig under the surface a bit and i'm sure there'd be plenty of scandal

I'm open to correction if anything emerges further down the line.

I've based the above opinion on the FACT that (a) you don't have to "scrutinise" much to find the names Haughey, Lenihan, Ahern, Lawlor, Burke, Cooper-Flynn, McCreevy, O'Donoghue and now O'Dea, and (b) when FG found out about Lowry they evicted him.

So there's a perfectly valid reason for the above opinion.

If and when they ever prove me wrong, I'll gladly accept the new evidence and reformulate my opinion accordingly.

meditraitor

dlofnep wrote: »

They are both populist parties, and generally have similar politics. Neither one of them will change the political landscape of Ireland. FG will tell you that they are the best party to get the job done - but there's a reason FG never held onto power in Ireland for any substantial period of time.

They might win the next election, but you can be sure they'll be back out the door again with Fianna Fáil taking their place.

This is my thinking on the subject but I can always be persuaded by a good argument.

My reason for starting this thread was not to start a tit for tat response type situation (already developing). I have seen some very good posters with FG leanings post on this forum and I would like them to engage with the subject.

So boys, anyone want to attempt to change my views or will I just continue thinking that the nightmare of two identicle majority parties is with us for another generation. A lost generation behind and another ahead because of bad leadership and an ignornant electorate.

johngalway

FF promise the sun, the moon & the stars. People elect them after swallowing the BS. The country goes down the tubes, people get mad at their own stupidity. FG get voted in to save the sinking ship, people have hope. FG due to economic situation are forced to take tough measures, people are unhappy. FF promise the sun, the moon................

Solution, leave FG in as long as FF have had this turn. Actually see what they are capable of doing in governing the country.

Moral, if you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got.

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

Well, I could go through the pros and cons of every administration in the state but I won't.Look at the FG Taoisigh-Costello-good in the 1st term, poor in the 2nd

FF have had (imo) the 2 best Taoisigh in Dev and Lemass. Dev's administration from 1951 to 1954 was a disaster, as were Haughey's first 2.

So "a disaster" still qualifies Dev as one of "the best 2 Taoisigh" ??

I'll agree with you (must be a first, eh ? :rolleyes: ) that Reynolds was pretty good.

smellslikeshoes

I personally think that even though their policies aren't that much different, change needs to happen. I'm of the firm belief that any party that is let stay in power for too long becomes lazy, complacent and corrupt. FF have been in long enough, it's time to give FG a shot.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Yup, because certain sections of the electorate view them as the emergency services when FF screw up.

FG come in, steady the ship with long-term stability in mind, and then some people decide that they want it all now, so they vote FF back in for a quick smash-and-grab, ignoring the previous track record.

"Steady the ship"???No chance.You look at someone like Garret Fitzgerald and what he did to Ireland and you realise that argument doesn't hold up to scrutiny.And the reason FG have never won 2 consecutive elections probably has something to do with the fact they promise the sun, moon and stars in their manifesto before every election and are never able to implement it properly.And "long term stability"?Have you seen FG administrations track records with NI??

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

And the reason FG have never won 2 consecutive elections probably has something to do with the fact they promise the sun, moon and stars in their manifesto before every election and are never able to implement it properly.

That can't be a factor, because it doesn't stop FF getting in.

"Zero tolerance on crime" being just one high-profile example.

Reneged on. By someone who ironically later objected to zero tolerance when it came to taking the piss with our money.

jmayo

f0ggy92 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure the level of corruption is the same fine gael just aren't under the spotlight or scrutinised as much so it doesn't come out. dig under the surface a bit and i'm sure there'd be plenty of scandal

How are you pretty sure of this ?
Please provide some evidence to this sweeping remark ?
Just because you come from the county that produced the biggest and most famous FG unethical (possibly corrupt but can not say due to our laws and rulesaround here) politican doesn't mean the rest all are the same.

The tribunals have always been populated by ff, they haven't had FG (or Labour) politicans trundling into them in anything like the same numbers.
And don't forget they just aren't any members they are minsiters, prime ministers and top ranking party office holders.

Also if you look FG (and Labour) don't vote confidence in their rotten apples as is the want of ff, and now their latest lackies the greens.

There might not be big difference in policies between ff and FG (and indeed Labour come to that), since the Irish people don't go for extermes in the same volume that other countries do.
Thus our main parties are centre of the road and populist across urban/rural divide and rich and not so rich.
You will find often that the lower socio econimic urban groups vote for fringe left wing parties or individuals or don't bother their asses voting at all.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

So "a disaster" still qualifies Dev as one of "the best 2 Taoisigh" ??

I'll agree with you (must be a first, eh ? :rolleyes: ) that Reynolds was pretty good.

When Dev lead Ireland from 1932 to 1948 he was a fantastic taoiseach.(I'm now just going to cut and paste from a different thread I posted on earlier).

Here we go-"I can see where you're coming from with Dev-he was a fantastic Taoiseach.Turning the country into a republic in "all but name", the constitution, successfully leading Ireland through WW2 were all magnificent achievements.He gets some criticism for his protectionism policies but people forget that this was only a few years since the wall street crash and was an accepted practice in the 1930s.And while some so-called historians such as TP Coogan have criticised him heavily in recent years I'm pleased to see that most historians have come around and seen him for what a great Taoiseach he was.So yes, Dev is certainly up there with the best of them."

Obviously, I'm quoting myself but I stand by everything I said in that thread.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That can't be a factor, because it doesn't stop FF getting in.

"Zero tolerance on crime" being just one high-profile example.

Reneged on. By someone who ironically later objected to zero tolerance when it came to taking the piss with our money.

Yes but FF don't do it every election.Has it never occured to you that FG might not be that popular because when people look down through history they realise FG have never been truly successful in government?

Boardnashea

Great thread. An issue I have thought about many times.
The only way progress is going to be made IMO is for the two of them to go into coalition together. There is no difference between them so if they are simply swapping government between them nothing will change.
If they did form a government they would then force, allow or stimulate a realistic opposition to be created. Labour/Greens/others would then have to get their act together rather than waiting to see who will get a look in at the next hung dail.

Liam Byrne

jmayo wrote: »

How are you pretty sure of this ?
Please provide some evidence to this sweeping remark ?

jmayo - this is FF we're talking about, remember ? You don't need to provide any evidence, you just say whatever you like with no proof to back it up.

It worked for Ahern & O'Dea.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

That can't be a factor, because it doesn't stop FF getting in.

"Zero tolerance on crime" being just one high-profile example.

Reneged on. By someone who ironically later objected to zero tolerance when it came to taking the piss with our money.

Yes but FF don't do it every election.Has it never occured to you that FG might not be that popular for the simple reason that when people look down through history they realise FG have never been truly successful in government?

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

Yes but FF don't do it every election.Has it never occured to you that FG might not be that popular for the simple reason that when people look down through history they realise FG have never been truly successful in government?

I'd actually counter that it's because people don't look down through history.

I mean, there are already people suggesting that we forget what Ahern did, and the balls FF made of the economy, and claiming that they're the best t lead us out of the mess they created.

johngalway

I'm laughing here. There are strong objections from some corners to a FG government. Why do I find this funny? Mainly because of the assertions that neither party is different from the other!

Fraidy cats

meditraitor

trapsagenius wrote: »

Yes but FF don't do it every election.Has it never occured to you that FG might not be that popular for the simple reason that when people look down through history they realise FG have never been truly successful in government?

Now we are getting to bones of it!

Is this because the way they provide government is the same as FF but FF are/were better at hiding the cracks?

Is the presumtion that the politic of FG and FF being no different has brought us to the were we are today wrong?

A simple analogy maybe,
You have a blow out on your car driving down the road and it nearly kills you, the following week you go out and buy the same tyre from the same garage and then another week passes and the same thing happens. Do you go back to the same garage and buy the same tyre?
Common sense say no but as Irish politics has proven we are doing this over and over again with our choice of government.

Why,

dlofnep

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Yup, because certain sections of the electorate view them as the emergency services when FF screw up.

If people are not in tune with the politics of FG all-year round, then that doesn't say alot for them. FG are opportunists. They wait for FF to mess up the country, and them promise to make things better, but ultimately fail at doing so.

The fact that they have never won 2 consecutive elections says alot.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

FG come in, steady the ship with long-term stability in mind, and then some people decide that they want it all now, so they vote FF back in for a quick smash-and-grab, ignoring the previous track record.

No, they don't. They come in the same as FF comes in - Promising change, but never delivering. Different sides of the same coin - each opportunists waiting for the other side to fall flat on it's arse.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I'd actually counter that it's because people don't look down through history.

I mean, there are already people suggesting that we forget what Ahern did, and the balls FF made of the economy, and claiming that they're the best t lead us out of the mess they created.

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point then.

meditraitor wrote: »

Now we are getting to bones of it!

Is this because the way they provide government is the same as FF but FF are/were better at hiding the cracks?

Is the presumtion that the politic of FG and FF being no different has brought us to the were we are today wrong?

A simple analogy maybe,
You have a blow out on your car driving down the road and it nearly kills you, the following week you go out and buy the same tyre from the same garage and then another week passes and the same thing happens. Do you go back to the same garage and buy the same tyre?
Common sense say no but as Irish politics has proven we are doing this over and over again with our choice of government.

Why,

For your first question, I would argue that FG have not been successful for the reason that they always try to accomplish too much in one term and never really end up accomplishing anything fully.They have also proven themselves again and again as being incompetent when it comes to dealing with NI. As I stated previously, imo the best administrations in the state were ones led by FF(Lemass and Dev).

A for you 2nd question, who knows?It could certainly be a factor.

BTW, sorry for slagging off the thread in my opening post-I didn't know you had deliberately left the title like that!

Liam Byrne

trapsagenius wrote: »

They have also proven themselves again and again as being incompetent when it comes to dealing with NI

Leave out the NI reference and you've got a perfect description of FF, at least in recent history.

And wasn't Haughey the one who wanted to import arms and turn it into an actual war ?

Riskymove

meditraitor wrote: »

Now we are getting to bones of it!

Is this because the way they provide government is the same as FF but FF are/were better at hiding the cracks?

Is the presumtion that the politic of FG and FF being no different has brought us to the were we are today wrong?

having read and watched a lot of items on this issue there are some general opinions:

a common one is the view that FF tell people what they want to hear, not neccessarily the truth. They have on more than one occassion, promised the earth at election time only to win and then subsequently do what FG had actually said THEY would do

FF have undoubtably been very good at realising "what" the people are looking for and construct the view that FF are "that"

with regard to politics, there is no doubt that the two parties are not that different to each other and both are entrenched in our current political system (how TDs work, campaign against each other etc). However, I think history will show far more scandals/negative stories about individuals on one particualr side!!

The old Haughey/Fitzgerald election story about how Fitzgerald was referred to by FF, derogatorily, as "Garrett the Good" is still a good one

concepts like goodness and honesty being dismissed as weak tells a lot

meditraitor

trapsagenius wrote: »

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point then.!

Thats fair, wouldnt be politics with disagreement

trapsagenius wrote: »

For your first question, I would argue that FG have not been successful for the reason that they always try to accomplish too much in one term and never really end up accomplishing anything fully.They have also proven themselves again and again as being incompetent when it comes to dealing with NI. As I stated previously, imo the best administrations in the state were ones led by FF(Lemass and Dev).!

Lemass and Dev had their moments but they have been followed during mine and my parents generation by some nasty pieces of work, Haughey for one. The current crop have shown as much incompetence during the last two terms as FG ever did.

I think we need a whole new way forward and FF/FG are so intrenched in their respective pasts and ideals that this will not be possible with either.

The left has never had power so why do we as a nation not try it out? Is there another way.........

trapsagenius wrote: »

A for you 2nd question, who knows?It could certainly be a factor.

BTW, sorry for slagging off the thread in my opening post-I didn't know you had deliberately left the title like that!

Its Ok, I should have used the proper spelling, its politics after all.

Funkfield

ronaneire wrote: »

The whole lot of them are the same. Every last one of them.

I remember when it was my first time to vote. I was, naïvely, a little excited that my vote would now count towards who ran the country.

I was asking everyone with a few years on me for their two cents about the parties, candidates etc.

And my dad, a wise man, turned to me and said "If its not one shower of cnuts, its the other".

A very, very wise man.

trapsagenius

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Leave out the NI reference and you've got a perfect description of FF, at least in recent history.

And wasn't Haughey the one who wanted to import arms and turn it into an actual war ?

Haughey did indeed want to import arms but you're divorcing the events from their historical context.It was late 1969, nationalists were after being burned out of their homes, and the whole south of Ireland is calling for them to be protected against the powerful sectarian forces in NI.So buying arms, while not necessarily the best choice, was certainly an understandable one.And it is still open to debate whether Lynch actually knew about the arms which would leave Haughey off the hook.And in the end it was under Haughey as Taoiseach in the late 80s that the proper way of dealing with NI was formulated.i.e realising that you have to deal with the hardliners on both sides if you want peace, instead of sidelining them(like Fitzgerald tried to do).

And anyway, with regards being incompetent, its not like FG have proven themselves to be economic wizards since the state came into being is it now?(Again, Garret Fitzgerald, anyone??)

IrishToffees

I think this point is been missed here. Irish politics is corrupt to the core. FF/FG/SF/LAB and others all have the same flaw which will guarantee Irish politics remains probably the most corrupt in the western world.
That is the majority of all politicians in ALL parties enter politics in Ireland for personal gain/wealth and not to serve and better the country. From entry level politics at local council level to the Dail it is looked at as a career and not a service to ones country. This mindset will guarantee corruption indefinitely!

dlofnep

If you want to know how the next elections go down.

FG & Labour win forming a coalition. Dáil is later dissolved due to disagreements in some key issue, because ultimately - FG & Labour are not compatible.

New elections are called. FF win again.

New thread is started in politics with lots of facepalms.

Dlofnep points everyone to this post, and receives huge amounts of thanks. Thread is then dissolved. Irish politics is as predictable and as terrible as our weather - cold, dark and ultimately never-changing.

trapsagenius

meditraitor wrote: »

Lemass and Dev had their moments but they have been followed during mine and my parents generation by some nasty pieces of work, Haughey for one. The current crop have shown as much incompetence during the last two terms as FG ever did.

I think we need a whole new way forward and FF/FG are so intrenched in their respective pasts and ideals that this will not be possible with either.

The left has never had power so why do we as a nation not try it out? Is there another way.........

Hmmm, its an idea to have lefties in power and it would be interesting to see if it would work.But left wingers would be opposed to Public Sector pay cuts, which could be economic suicide.I mean could you imagine if Pat Rabitte(a former marxist for fvcks sake)was finance minister at the moment?Would he favour Public Sector pay cuts?It's more likely he'd favour crippling levels of taxation which don't work because it gives people no incentive to work.I'd say lefties would be better in a period of economic growth rather than economic stagnation.

meditraitor

IrishToffees wrote: »

I think this point is been missed here. Irish politics is corrupt to the core. FF/FG/SF/LAB and others all have the same flaw which will guarantee Irish politics remains probably the most corrupt in the western world.
That is the majority of all politicians in ALL parties enter politics in Ireland for personal gain/wealth and not to serve and better the country. From entry level politics at local council level to the Dail it is looked at as a career and not a service to ones country. This mindset will guarantee corruption indefinitely!

Do you believe that there are no altruistic politicians? Ive heard this opinion many times over the past few years.

I can think of a good few politicians that are not in it for the money, the green party membership (majority, seargent etc) for example. Im not sticking up for the present bunch and their despicable behaviour of late by the way

meditraitor

trapsagenius wrote: »

Hmmm, its an idea to have lefties in power and it would be interesting to see if it would work.But left wingers would be opposed to Public Sector pay cuts, which could be economic suicide.I mean could you imagine if Pat Rabitte(a former marxist for fvcks sake)was finance minister at the moment?Would he favour Public Sector pay cuts?It's more likely he'd favour crippling levels of taxation which don't work because it gives people no incentive to work.I'd say lefties would be better in a period of economic growth rather than economic stagnation.

Its a difficult one all right, the labour party has been gradually eroding the ties to big unions for 20 years and will be better for it but there are still some hurdles.
The labour position on PS pay is that cuts are required, but whether the cuts are deep enough is another thread. I would say one thing in their defence on this subject. Do you think that the PS and their unions would have had the run of themselves over the past 20 years if labour had have been in government. I doubt it very much. There lies the problem.

The solution to the problem created by FF is difficult but these are probelms that we would not have had if Labour/SF/greens had been in a position of power to stop the crazy pay increases.

Riskymove

IrishToffees wrote: »

That is the majority of all politicians in ALL parties enter politics in Ireland for personal gain/wealth and not to serve and better the country.

that idea is bandied about and yet....there are a number of long-term politicians whose backgrounds are doctors, solicitors/barristers, publicans etc, not to mention succesful businessmen like Albert Reynolds etc

they were hardly short of a few bob and in some cases I'd say could have made more money if they had not entered politics!

tbh I think its one of those urban myths taken for granted...but that's not to say that some do enter poltiics for those kinds of reasons

themont85

In fairness to FG, they have never had a substational portion of the majority (barring maybe Fitzgearld with 65 seats) and have always needed Labour, both are opposits in theory on economic matters. We've have never seen how they'd govern as a party if given some of the powerful Government positions that Fianna Fáil have had. Fitzgearld inheirited a fiscal disaster and whilst it is arguble that he should have done more, having a minority of the size of Fianna Fáil who said 'no' to every progressive measure they had.

Lemass was undoubtably our greatest Taoiseach.

For a man who was Taoiseach/leader for 20 odd years, deValera's achievments are lacking to say the least. All style and no substance was the order of the day with Dev. The Irish Press was also a disgrace as big as Haughey's carry on.

Shea O'Meara

Liam Byrne wrote: »

I'm open to correction if anything emerges further down the line.

I've based the above opinion on the FACT that (a) you don't have to "scrutinise" much to find the names Haughey, Lenihan, Ahern, Lawlor, Burke, Cooper-Flynn, McCreevy, O'Donoghue and now O'Dea, and (b) when FG found out about Lowry they evicted him.

So there's a perfectly valid reason for the above opinion.

If and when they ever prove me wrong, I'll gladly accept the new evidence and reformulate my opinion accordingly.

You forgot DeValera. Look into the Irish Press. Sold 'A' shares to Irish people at home and abroad under the guise of Nationalism. The shares were worthless....had 'B' shares on the quiet which he kept for himself and his family, who still have access to those stolen monies in other forms today.

IrishToffees

Riskymove wrote: »

that idea is bandied about and yet....there are a number of long-term politicians whose backgrounds are doctors, solicitors/barristers, publicans etc, not to mention succesful businessmen like Albert Reynolds etc

they were hardly short of a few bob and in some cases I'd say could have made more money if they had not entered politics!

tbh I think its one of those urban myths taken for granted...but that's not to say that some do enter poltiics for those kinds of reasons

As I said in my original post I believe the majority are in it for personal gain and wealth. I think you are living in a fantasy utopian political world to suggest that this is an urban myth. I acknowledge there are some politicians from all parties who have left higher salaries and professions than TD/Senate/Councillor salaries but I think you'll find they are the minority.

Laminations

dlofnep wrote: »

The fact that they have never won 2 consecutive elections says alot.

Maybe thats down to the fact they dont short sightedly buy elections but think of the long term welfare of the state. Look what FFs last 3 consecutive terms have brought us with their 'spending while ya have it' attitude

Is it just FFers that think the parties are both the same? So if they are both the same, then if you are not going to vote for a smaller party or independents just vote FG, sure whats the difference. Or is 'they are all the same' just reserved as a reason to continue voting FF?

Shea O'Meara

trapsagenius wrote: »

Hmmm, its an idea to have lefties in power and it would be interesting to see if it would work.But left wingers would be opposed to Public Sector pay cuts, which could be economic suicide.I mean could you imagine if Pat Rabitte(a former marxist for fvcks sake)was finance minister at the moment?Would he favour Public Sector pay cuts?It's more likely he'd favour crippling levels of taxation which don't work because it gives people no incentive to work.I'd say lefties would be better in a period of economic growth rather than economic stagnation.

What they need do is dispel the panic the words 'the left' put into some people. They are shying away from the unions more and more. I believe they will always lean towards supporting them, but these days I think it unlikely they'll simply do what they're told to do by the unions.
The link between the two is one of a fair deal and fair representation. Of course that's debatable, but I for one think unions are very necessary and believing them always on the make and leading to our economic destruction a brainwashing tactic of the right.
Labour were banging on about investing in education and health for the past several years, (if not longer) and investing in home grown business/small business too. I would like to see them get a good look in next time around.
I personally know a number of Fine Gael members, at various levels and I can say, they differ from the Fianna Fail members I've come across. The Fine Gael folk, (these are my experiences by the way) are in it for the prestige with civic duty coming second. Fianna Fail folk are in it for the power, the nod and the wink.

Sleepy

The chief differnce between FF & FG aside from lower levels of corruption?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tallaght_Strategy

BennyLava

It appears that most Irish voters follow the policy of better the devil you know when it comes to voting,

"Ah shure, the other lot are the same/ worse" mentality

The only reason politics is the way it is in this country is because of the above attitudes, usually espoused by FF's ( mentally they can't conceive of a political party been run any other way)

Ultimately we get the government we deserve, as long as we as an electorate keep voting the same people in, no matter what they do

what do we expect